 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|
Informational influence
The informational influence explanation focuses on the arguments that emerge during group discussion. In a group where there is a clear majority favoring one side of an issue from the beginning, most of the arguments and evidence introduced during the discussion will tend to be in support of that dominant viewpoint. People in the minority will thus hear many arguments against their position, while people in the majority will hear many arguments supporting their position <REF>(Vinokur & Burnstein, 1974; Stewart & Stasser, 1995). As a result, everyone in the group may move to a more extreme position in the direction of the majority. A politically neutral student who engages in discussions of social issues with members of the campus Young Republicans society, for example, will probably hear many conservative arguments and few liberal ones. As a result, she may be persuaded by the arguments she hears and her political tastes may shift in the direction of conservatism. This process may also explain the striking convergence of opinion in jury trials; over 97% of the time, juries end up unanimously deciding on the verdict that was preferred by the majority of jurors at start of their deliberations <REF>(Kalven & Zeisel, 1966). Normative influence
The second explanation for group polarization focuses on the emergence of group norms. Roger Brown <REF>(1965) has suggested that during group discussions, we end up comparing our own opinions and attitudes to those of the other group members. There is a natural tendency to want to evaluate the correctness or the appropriateness of our opinions by seeking information about what others believe. Psychologists refer to this as the process of social comparison <REF>(Festinger, 1954). Once we discover what the majority of the people in the group believe, we may feel pressure to shift our opinions in the direction of that "norm." In fact, because we usually want other people to respect and approve of us, we may be motivated to express attitudes that are even stronger or more extreme than what we are hearing from others. If everyone in the group feels such pressures, it is easy to see how members' attitudes and decisions can spiral into more extreme versions over the course of group discussion. |
||||||||||||
|
